Friday, June 25, 2004
Why Isn't Anyone Saying This?
For those of you who've just joined me, so to speak, you may be under the impression that I'm some old skool Democrat of the Proud Donkey tradition. If that's the impression you've gotten, pack it in, it doesn't fit. Long-time readers know I don't have any affiliation and have said some rather unkind things about the Democrats in past posts; I really take them to task. Necessity has made me an ABB voter and anti-Nader, something I wouldn't have said a year or so ago. The preznit has driven this far-left crackpot to the center.
With that said, one of the things that is infuriating me is the Dem's/Kerry's inability to deal with issues head on. The same damn thing that's been happening for over 20 years, since Jimmy Carter got shellacked by Zombie Ronnie. With few exceptions, Democrats have been hiding from the "lib-ruhl" label and playing conciliatory games with the Right at the expense of working people and the progressive agenda. The latest hide-the-sausage slight of hand they've been shucking is addressing the economic growth of the last 10 months.
It's a ball that Bu$hCo believes is in it's court, Kerry won't bother to steal it, they got the ball, Democrats have no balls... huh? Well why not steal the goddamn ball?
First of all, the Cabal of Thugs report some pretty hinkey numbers in order to justify the tax cuts - new jobs, blah blah blah. Yeah, but this is an administration that will still have an aggragate loss of almost 2 million jobs (after adding in the jobs created) and almost 10% unemployed (in REAL numbers, not phoney-baloney DoL numbers). 1 in 10 is out of a job, you'd think that might hurt Bush. And it's not like Kerry is running away from those numbers.
Still, there is a "recovery" going on, a scintilla of economic growth that the Kerry camp kind of coughs and rubs their hands at before they change the subject. Pipsqueak growth, in fact,
but enough for the Thug Cabal to point to and yammer, "See? SEE?!? We told you tax cuts for the rich would boost the economy!" What they aren't telling us is how much of that growth is attributed to a Wartime Economy.
Remember that? Remember how, before the war started, a few protesters insisted that this administration was going to war just to jump-start the economy? And how a lot of pro-Bush/War pinheads pulled the argument of Wartime Economy out as their last refuge, scoundrel-wise? Thing is... it's TRUE.
Hell, anybody with access to The History Channel knows that when this country goes to war (Civil War included), people get rich - with or without the benefit of being vice-preznit. After people right and left bitched about our troops not having sufficient body armor and that humvees were vulnerable to roadside bombs, our patriotic corporate executives got to work on those problems... see?
Never mind that a sizable chunk of the money is being sheltered off-shore... hell, mer-kins are at work again, got it? Haliburton is hiring like crazy... sorry if you just got pink-slipped from MCI but you may want to think about a "short-term commitment" with the National Guard.
Now it seems like EVERYONE, Right and Left, mull this economic upswing, either overstating it or looking at it like it was some bastard child come to grub, mumbling about it being 'cyclic' or praising it as a "miracle of free-market economics" (cuz, you know, no one has yet to provide me proof that tax cuts for the rich have led to long-term economic growth). Lip-service all around and no one wants the reals when the answer is right there in their fucking face.
The problem I have is that the Right isn't honest enough to admit that this small blip is due to deficit spending allocated towards war material while the Left (and the Democrats who once held a place on the Left) isn't honest enough to acknowledge that, yes, there's economic growth but it's only because we're killing a couple dozen or so American women and men every week, if it wasn't for wartime development we'd be happy to be shining the hubcaps of some asshole's Rolls Royce.
WHY ISN'T ANYBODY SAYING THIS?
If Bush stands a chance in November, it's because he's diverted attention from the failure of the war to the "success" of the economy. Therefore, all Democrats need do is point out that the economy is PROBABLY due to the war (I'll explain in a minute), thus... POINTING BACK TO THE FAILURE OF THE WAR. It didn't take me five beers to figure that out, believe me. It's obvious that the Administration has no say on national security, comparing war records is absurd, during the debates Bush is going to look like the stoner kid in geometry class... all they have left is the economy and... well, I just told you how this all comes full circle.
"PROBABLY due to the war" - make it a soft sell. Let people decide for themselves if the lives of their sons and daughters are worth the creation of jobs... "Yeah, well EVERYONE knows war drives an economy but look at the war you took us into...", an apparently (by today's polls) increasingly unpopular war. Mer-kins can see that this economic recovery is half-assed (1 in 10 chance they're unemployed, hell) and that the numbers they hear on the nooze are baked, abstractions, utter shit.
All the Kerry ads in Colorado have been positive, "I'm John Kerry, this is my plan, yadda..." but all the Bush ads are negative: "John Kerry wants to use your paycheck to finance a peccadillo between your wife and Bill Clinton." Something like that... anyone anywhere else see it differently (is Kerry only going ALL POSITIVE in Colorado?). So the Kerry campaign is already into the soft sell stuff, as I see it, there's no need to hammer this issue; people can see it for themselves.
On the topic of seeing it for themselves, I didn't get to go see FAHRENHEIT 9/11 (got the kids, too young to take) but friends have and all of them say it was excellent, better than BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE, take someone who's sitting on the fence for this election, they'll be PISSED. Get your tickets and go to the show...
Show? In Denver at Eck's Saloon....
With that said, one of the things that is infuriating me is the Dem's/Kerry's inability to deal with issues head on. The same damn thing that's been happening for over 20 years, since Jimmy Carter got shellacked by Zombie Ronnie. With few exceptions, Democrats have been hiding from the "lib-ruhl" label and playing conciliatory games with the Right at the expense of working people and the progressive agenda. The latest hide-the-sausage slight of hand they've been shucking is addressing the economic growth of the last 10 months.
It's a ball that Bu$hCo believes is in it's court, Kerry won't bother to steal it, they got the ball, Democrats have no balls... huh? Well why not steal the goddamn ball?
First of all, the Cabal of Thugs report some pretty hinkey numbers in order to justify the tax cuts - new jobs, blah blah blah. Yeah, but this is an administration that will still have an aggragate loss of almost 2 million jobs (after adding in the jobs created) and almost 10% unemployed (in REAL numbers, not phoney-baloney DoL numbers). 1 in 10 is out of a job, you'd think that might hurt Bush. And it's not like Kerry is running away from those numbers.
Still, there is a "recovery" going on, a scintilla of economic growth that the Kerry camp kind of coughs and rubs their hands at before they change the subject. Pipsqueak growth, in fact,
The Commerce Department surprised economists with a downward revision to first-quarter gross domestic product, cutting economic growth to a 3.9 percent annual rate from the 4.4 percent reported a month ago. Wall Street analysts had not expected the Commerce Department to change the GDP estimate.
but enough for the Thug Cabal to point to and yammer, "See? SEE?!? We told you tax cuts for the rich would boost the economy!" What they aren't telling us is how much of that growth is attributed to a Wartime Economy.
Remember that? Remember how, before the war started, a few protesters insisted that this administration was going to war just to jump-start the economy? And how a lot of pro-Bush/War pinheads pulled the argument of Wartime Economy out as their last refuge, scoundrel-wise? Thing is... it's TRUE.
Hell, anybody with access to The History Channel knows that when this country goes to war (Civil War included), people get rich - with or without the benefit of being vice-preznit. After people right and left bitched about our troops not having sufficient body armor and that humvees were vulnerable to roadside bombs, our patriotic corporate executives got to work on those problems... see?
Never mind that a sizable chunk of the money is being sheltered off-shore... hell, mer-kins are at work again, got it? Haliburton is hiring like crazy... sorry if you just got pink-slipped from MCI but you may want to think about a "short-term commitment" with the National Guard.
Now it seems like EVERYONE, Right and Left, mull this economic upswing, either overstating it or looking at it like it was some bastard child come to grub, mumbling about it being 'cyclic' or praising it as a "miracle of free-market economics" (cuz, you know, no one has yet to provide me proof that tax cuts for the rich have led to long-term economic growth). Lip-service all around and no one wants the reals when the answer is right there in their fucking face.
The problem I have is that the Right isn't honest enough to admit that this small blip is due to deficit spending allocated towards war material while the Left (and the Democrats who once held a place on the Left) isn't honest enough to acknowledge that, yes, there's economic growth but it's only because we're killing a couple dozen or so American women and men every week, if it wasn't for wartime development we'd be happy to be shining the hubcaps of some asshole's Rolls Royce.
WHY ISN'T ANYBODY SAYING THIS?
If Bush stands a chance in November, it's because he's diverted attention from the failure of the war to the "success" of the economy. Therefore, all Democrats need do is point out that the economy is PROBABLY due to the war (I'll explain in a minute), thus... POINTING BACK TO THE FAILURE OF THE WAR. It didn't take me five beers to figure that out, believe me. It's obvious that the Administration has no say on national security, comparing war records is absurd, during the debates Bush is going to look like the stoner kid in geometry class... all they have left is the economy and... well, I just told you how this all comes full circle.
"PROBABLY due to the war" - make it a soft sell. Let people decide for themselves if the lives of their sons and daughters are worth the creation of jobs... "Yeah, well EVERYONE knows war drives an economy but look at the war you took us into...", an apparently (by today's polls) increasingly unpopular war. Mer-kins can see that this economic recovery is half-assed (1 in 10 chance they're unemployed, hell) and that the numbers they hear on the nooze are baked, abstractions, utter shit.
All the Kerry ads in Colorado have been positive, "I'm John Kerry, this is my plan, yadda..." but all the Bush ads are negative: "John Kerry wants to use your paycheck to finance a peccadillo between your wife and Bill Clinton." Something like that... anyone anywhere else see it differently (is Kerry only going ALL POSITIVE in Colorado?). So the Kerry campaign is already into the soft sell stuff, as I see it, there's no need to hammer this issue; people can see it for themselves.
On the topic of seeing it for themselves, I didn't get to go see FAHRENHEIT 9/11 (got the kids, too young to take) but friends have and all of them say it was excellent, better than BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE, take someone who's sitting on the fence for this election, they'll be PISSED. Get your tickets and go to the show...
Show? In Denver at Eck's Saloon....
